Dharmendra Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15550 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-285 Year-2022 Thana- DHAMDAHA District- Purnia ====================================================== Dharmendra Mandal Son of Late Chhedi Mandal Village- Navabganj, Police Station- Kursela Dist- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satyendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 13-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 20(b)(ii) (C)/25 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

As per FIR, prosecution case relates to recovery of total 149.87 kg incriminating ganja from the house of brotherin-law of the petitioner and the petitioner was apprehended on the spot. Accordingly, this case has been lodged. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the place of occurrence does not belong to the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery of ganja like narcotic substance. He has got no criminal antecedent as stated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15550 of 2023(4) dt.13-07-2023 2/2 in para-3 of the bail petition. It is also submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 03.10.2022. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and he was also apprehended on the spot with huge quantity of incriminating ganja. The alleged recovery of 149.87 kg incriminating ganja is much more than commercial quantity as per the N.D.P.S. Act. Further, seizure list witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) lata/- U T